• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

Attack on Titan - Canon Adjustment and Clarifications

Status
Not open for further replies.
Physics is a field of discovery, aka science. Nothing a scientist says will ever technically be factual, just an educated conclusion based on countless trial and error off a claim, and if it hasn't been disproven yet, then it's treated as "fact."

An author of a story isn't discovering anything; the story is theirs, and everything they say and add to the story is factual inherently.

If you were talking about an Illustrator or an Assistant, you would have a point. Not the one who makes the rules of the story.
I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
 
I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
Going the JK Rowling route is a wild example
 
I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
Is this not still just a retcon?

or are you trying to argue something similar to how Kodansha owns the IP and by extension control of it Isayama would not have the sole control over what is canon? other than that I really don't see a valid counter
 
Also that is just straight wrong, the character would be trans then, that’s not even a contradiction in your scenario. That would be boys love still lol.
I think what you meant to say is there is a character who is absolutely a boy throughout the entire story but after the story the writer says they are a girl. That’s a contradiction, but depending on the context that could still fit in the story. Also that doesn’t apply here at all though because this is about a change actually directly made to the story that the creator actively said he wanted. Like he’s going back in and actually making the change, not just saying a full on contradiction in hindsight. And even then that’s death of the author not appeal to authority
 
I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
Thats just a retcon. A dumb retcon, but nonetheless a retcon.
 
Going the JK Rowling route is a wild example
I wanna shoot myself after this

I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
Ahh yes, let's consider Star Wars Legends to be part of the Disney continuity regardless of what Disney says, because their retconning it is "appeal to authority."


Congratulations, you described what a retcon is. Legit, all they did was give additional details to a character. There is nothing contradictory in your example.
 
Ahh yes, let's consider Star Wars Legends to be part of the Disney continuity regardless of what Disney says, because their retconning it is "appeal to authority."

Congratulations, you described what a retcon is. Legit, all they did was give additional details to a character. There is nothing contradictory in your example.
Hell yeah, make Starkiller canon again
 
Appealing to Authority isn't an inherently fallacious thing to do. We always appeal to some level of authority, and we do so for logically sound reasons; we do it on site regarding complicated, philosophical or mathematical topics since these topics require a knowledge-base to comprehend and reasonably comment upon.

It would be fallacious to appeal to an unsubstantiated authority since there is no basis in believing what they say is true, if it isn't supported by consensus or expertise. The dude is literally the author of the story, his word regarding how he wishes the story to be is unquestionable. You can personally disagree with it, but to say his word is meaningless is incorrect since he is the ultimate authority - the author of the story.
 
I think theres been some confusion as to what an appeal to authority is. Just because they made it, doesn't mean they can change something after the fact. It's like if I made a boys love book and then said after the book was finished the main character is actually a trans person. Using that is an appeal to authority and it would apply here.
Wild you're using an example like that here of all places. If that's your justification to say this is just an appeal to authority and not a proper retcon, then holy shit you need to get your priorities straight.
 
So like, do i need to put this in a blog or? Do i just link this thread on the verse page?
 
With all being said, we are in no position to dictate what is and isn't canon and what is and isn't a fallacy, that's up to the author who dictates the story, unless you suddenly think you have the higher authority than he does when it comes to dictating the story, the license and the property rights. Good luck actually challenging that in court, see how far you get.

I'm serious BTW. If this is the best argument you got, you better lawyer up to go against Isayama to see who has the higher authority over AoT.
 
Last edited:
So like, do i need to put this in a blog or? Do i just link this thread on the verse page?
You can't link a thread directly to the verse page, you'd need to make a blog. How many staff accepted this? I can tag more to make this solid.
 
Four, you, Nierre, Medeus, and Tracer
I'm just a CGM without approval rights in a CRT, so that's about 3. I'll tag some more folk.

@Mr. Bambu @Agnaa @Planck69 @LephyrTheRevanchist @Elizhaa @Dereck03 @LordGriffin1000 @Maverick_Zero_X @Colonel_Krukov @Qawsedf234 @KingTempest @UchihaSlayer96 @Theglassman12 @ActuallySpaceMan42 @Catzlaflame @Emirp sumitpo @Reiner04 @Dalesean027 Can y'all help out here? Some of these "Appeal to authority" arguments are going wild.
 
Last edited:
Wild you're using an example like that here of all places. If that's your justification to say this is just an appeal to authority and not a proper retcon, then holy shit you need to get your priorities straight.
Drop the attitude please.
With all being said, we are in no position to dictate what is and isn't canon and what is and isn't a fallacy, that's up to the author who dictates the story, unless you suddenly think you have the higher authority than he does when it comes to dictating the story, the license and the property rights. Good luck actually challenging that in court, see how far you get.

I'm serious BTW. If this is the best argument you got, you better lawyer up to go against Isayama to see who has the higher authority over AoT.
Well, we kinda are. A fallacy is when something is logically flawed, why is the author changing his work after the fact it's been published logically flawed? Because it doesn't necessarily line up with primary cannon, to use it to scale character is fallacious in and of itself.

An appeal to authority is a type of argument where someone claims a statement is true simply because an authority figure or expert said it, without providing further evidence or justification. This is what's happening here, you're using an authors claim on his work after the fact his work is finished, that doesn't make it cannon if it conflicts with the original scaling of the story.
 
Drop the attitude please.
I think my attitude to this situation is completely justified given your complete and total lack of any idea or knowledge about how property rights work. I don't think you are at any liberty to tell me that after how you played us staff like a damn fiddle.

Well, we kinda are. A fallacy is when something is logically flawed, why is the author changing his work after the fact it's been published logically flawed? Because it doesn't necessarily line up with primary cannon, to use it to scale character is fallacious in and of itself.
He's the author, he can do whatever he wants with his story whether you like it or not. It is not up to us battle-boarders to dictate that, not me and definitely not you.

An appeal to authority is a type of argument where someone claims a statement is true simply because an authority figure or expert said it, without providing further evidence or justification.

This is what's happening here, you're using an authors claim on his work after the fact his work is finished, that doesn't make it cannon if it conflicts with the original scaling of the story.
The fact that you even have to go to such extreme pedantic lengths to go against ownership law and property rights law is just bizarre. I have half a mind to just message the staff and shut your arguments down on the spot but I'll give you benefit of the doubt.

Like I said, lawyer up and challenge Isayama in court, and win a multi-billion dollar class-action lawsuit (Given it's in Japan, LOL). Otherwise your arguments don't hold up. Plain and simple.
 
Last edited:
I'll just link to the Canon page for further clarification.

 
I think my attitude to this situation is completely justified given your complete and total lack of any idea or knowledge about how property rights work. I don't think you are at any liberty to tell me that after how you played us staff like a damn fiddle.
I was in early psychosis and struggled with other severe mental illness, I'm to blame for my actions but I don't deserve to be treated the way you're treating me.

He's the author, he can do whatever he wants with his story whether you like it or not. It is not up to us battle-boarders to dictate that, not me and definitely not you.
You're kinda stonewalling here, you're just making another fallacious claim. Appeal to authority.
The fact that you even have to go to such extreme pedantic lengths to go against ownership law and property rights law is just bizarre. I have half a mind to just message the staff and shut your arguments down on the spot but I'll give you benefit of the doubt.
Stop acting like a child please. This is a debate.
I'll just link to the Canon page for further clarification.

This doesn't change anything.
 
Appealing to Authority isn't an inherently fallacious thing to do.
You named a fallacy and said it's not a fallacy. What...
We always appeal to some level of authority, and we do so for logically sound reasons; we do it on site regarding complicated, philosophical or mathematical topics since these topics require a knowledge-base to comprehend and reasonably comment upon.
The difference is that they have proof, they have proof as to why they're right. Which gives people a reason to assume it to be correct. There is no reason as to why we should assume the authors words to be absolute.
 
I was in early psychosis, I'm to blame for my actions but I don't deserve to be treated the way you're treating me.
Doesn't give you the excuse to do what you did. I have every right to be wary around you for your rule violations so excuse me if I don't agree with you. It's gonna be a ridiculous uphill battle for you to regain our trust back after what you did.

You're kinda stonewalling here, you're just making another fallacious claim. Appeal to authority.
You think I'm stonewalling, read the Canon Page. You don't agree, then make a Staff thread.

Stop acting like a child please. This is a debate.
Then stop with these condescending derailing remarks that do nothing to address my arguments. The laws dictating property ownership are clear. I've already tagged staff, so stop dragging this out with your silly pedantism. It's unwarranted here.

This doesn't change anything.
IDC if you think this changes nothing, your "appeal to authority" arguments don't work here on this site with the current rules. If you still disagree, make a staff CRT, or forever hold your peace, because as it stands, staff are not exactly in agreement with you, and you are not doing them any favors with this kind of pedantism.
 
A story isn't a mathematical theory or a well-formulated formula, where contradiction leads to the destruction of the current formation of either. A story is a collection of events that, when specifically discussing a fictional story, is all dependent on how the author directs it. If he initially created a set of events that occur a specific way, and he decides to re-work those events in the future, it's entirely his prerogative as his work isn't dependent on logical consistency, it's dependent on what he writes into it.
 
Doesn't give you the excuse to do what you did. I have every right to be wary around you for your rule violations so excuse me if I don't agree with you. It's gonna be a ridiculous uphill battle for you to regain our trust back after what you did.
I literally never did say it gave me an excuse. What it does give me is a right to be treated with the respect you treat others with.
You think I'm stonewalling, read the Canon Page. You don't agree, then make a Staff thread.
"Read the page"
Then stop with these condescending derailing remarks that do nothing to address my arguments. The laws dictating property ownership are clear. I've already tagged staff, so stop dragging this out with your silly pedantism. It's unwarranted here.
Ironic.

IDC if you think this changes nothing, your "appeal to authority" arguments don't work here on this site with the current rules. If you still disagree, make a staff CRT, or forever hold your peace, because as it stands, staff are not exactly in agreement with you.
Staff not being in agreement with me doesn't make me wrong, and it doesn't mean I have to make a site wide crt.
A story isn't a mathematical theory or a well-formulated formula, where contradiction leads to the destruction of the current formation of either. A story is a collection of events that, when specifically discussing a fictional story, is all dependent on how the author directs it. If he initially created a set of events that occur a specific way, and he decides to re-work those events in the future, it's entirely his prerogative as his work isn't dependent on logical consistency, it's dependent on what he writes into it.
Well you're just falling under fallacious territory. Just because you made the work and published it, doesn't mean you have the authority to change it after it's published and contradict it's original material.
 
I literally never did say it gave me an excuse. What it does give me is a right to be treated with the respect you treat others with.
Right now in my eyes you don't deserve my respect. Respect is earned, not bought, and you have done nothing to earn it from me with your history.

Staff not being in agreement with me doesn't make me wrong, and it doesn't mean I have to make a site wide crt.

Well you're just falling under fallacious territory. Just because you made the work and published it, doesn't mean you have the authority to change it after it's published and contradict it's original material.
I. DO NOT. CARE. Make a Staff CRT or else your stuff isn't getting accepted: PERIOD.
 
Klol can you chill down?

Vzearr is severly outvoted and outargued, his arguments literally boil down to "I said so". This thread passed with 4 Staffmembers agreeing and is only in grace right now. Ignore him and get this done
 
You named a fallacy and said it's not a fallacy. What..
It's definitely, not always, a fallacy. I can send you receipts of this being the case. IEP has an entire section on their Fallacies page that explains why an "Appeal to Authority" isn't always fallacious. I can also go check SEP, and they'll also probably have an excerpt on how an Appeal to Authority isn't necessarily fallacious.

The difference is that they have proof, they have proof as to why they're right. Which gives people a reason to assume it to be correct. There is no reason as to why we should assume the authors words to be absolute.
The proof in this situation is that the author who created the story is telling you that your assertion is incorrect. Everyone is going to accept what the author says as being factually true when it comes to their story, obviously - it's their story. How can you make any assertions about what should be considered in a story if the author themselves is contradicting you? You can't supersede the author and his decisions.

Well you're just falling under fallacious territory. Just because you made the work and published it, doesn't mean you have the authority to change it after it's published and contradict it's original material.
Why is contradicting established events in your story meaningfully fallacious, where if the author themselves decide to revise those events and switch them, we must disregard these new set of events? You're just asserting that since it's logically contradictory, we shouldn't listen to the author. But you haven't even substantially explained why Logic is important to a fictional story - to the point of completely disregarding the literal person who created it.
 
Klol can you chill down?

Vzearr is severly outvoted and outargued, his arguments literally boil down to "I said so". This thread passed with 4 Staffmembers agreeing and is only in grace right now. Ignore him and get this done
Said my piece, now I'll just wait for the staff I tagged.

Also IIRC it was 3 votes since my vote as a CGM doesn't count. So RN it's DDM, Tracer and Nierre.
 
It's definitely, not always, a fallacy. I can send you receipts of this being the case. IEP has an entire section on their Fallacies page that explains why an "Appeal to Authority" isn't always fallacious. I can also go check SEP, and they'll also probably have an excerpt on how an Appeal to Authority isn't necessarily fallacious.
You can't inherently say a fallacy can sometimes not be that fallacy if it's a fallacy. That just makes no sense.

The proof in this situation is that the author who created the story is telling you that your assertion is incorrect. Everyone is going to accept what the author says as being factually true when it comes to their story, obviously - it's their story. How can you make any assertions about what should be considered in a story if the author themselves is contradicting you? You can't supersede the author and his decisions.
Just because it's their story doesn't make everything they say about that story cannon, I don't know how I can make this easier to understand but I'll try.

Author finishes book.
Anime adapts that book.
Author sees this and supervises things that change the original cannon of this book.
Author's book is now no longer cannon because the anime is technically cannon according to you.
You can't have two cannons, it doesn't work that way
 
The OP is reasonable, and Vzearr's contention is ill-founded and contradicts our Canon page.
The generally agreed-upon definition is that the work by the original author and creator of the fictional setting is canonical, unless the author or the copyright holder declares otherwise.
If there are no other substantive objections I've glossed over, then I agree with this change.
 
And grace.

Actually no wait, grace starts from the creation of the thread. We've gone past grace, we can apply this now, I think?
 
Just because it's their story doesn't make everything they say about that story cannon, I don't know how I can make this easier to understand but I'll try.

Author finishes book.
Anime adapts that book.
Author sees this and supervises things that change the original cannon of this book.
Author's book is now no longer cannon because the anime is technically cannon according to you.
You can't have two cannons, it doesn't work that way
Again, this is not what happened with this story. To put it how you did, it would be:

Author starts book.
Author gets halfway through book.
Anime starts to adapt that book.
Author sees the anime and supervises things that change the original canon of this book, while also changing the newly written chapters of the book to be more in line with the anime.
Author's book is now no longer canon because the anime is the new canon.
 
The OP is reasonable, and Vzearr's contention is ill-founded and contradicts our Canon page.

If there are no other substantive objections I've glossed over, then I agree with this change.
The thing you sent is too vague to be valid. He's the original author sure, but if he changes the anime from the manga then that makes two contradicting cannons.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top